Economic Education Analysis Journal
SINTA 5 Accredited
https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eeaj
Differences in Learning Outcomes Between Students Tested in Written Tests and Oral Tests in Economics Subjects
Yuni Puspita1, Syarwani Ahmad2, Nurlina3
DOI: 10.15294/eeaj.v11i1.54012
123Department of Accounting Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, PGRI University Palem- bang, Palembang, Indonesia
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the results of differences in learning outcomes between stu- dents who were given a written test and an oral test on economics subjects. The population in this study were all students of class X IPS, which amounted to 97 students. The sampling tech- nique in this study used random sampling. Data collection methods used documentation and tests. The results of this research for class X IPS 1 showed that the average score of the written test results was 80-86, totaling 6 people or 18.75% of the students who took the test, and were categorized as very good. 12 students who scored 66-79 or 37.5% were categorized as good.
6 students who scored 59-65 or 18.75% were categorized as sufficient while students who got a score of 45-58 were 8 people or 24.98% were categorized as poor while in class X IPS2 stu- dents who got a score of 66-79 totaling 11 people or 34.40% were categorized as good while students who scored 59-65 totaling 11 people or 34.40% were categorized as good enough. 10 students who got a score of 40-53 or 31.20% were categorized as less good.
How to Cite
Puspita, Y., Ahmad, S., & Nurlina, N. (2022). Differences in Learning Outcomes Between Students Tested in Written Tests and Oral Tests in Economics Subjects. Economic Education Analysis Journal, 11(1), 9-17.
© 2022 Universitas Negeri Semarang Article History
Received: 22 January 2022 Approved: 2 February 2022 Published: 24 February 2022
Keywords
Competence; Learning Outcomes;
Written Test; Oral Test
Correspondance Address:
123Jl. Wisatadanauranau, ds WaytimahKec Banding Agung, OKU Selatan. 32274 Email: 1[email protected], 2syarwaniahmad@univpgri-palembang.
ac.id, 3[email protected]
p-ISSN 2252-6544 e-ISSN 2502-356X
minimum completeness criteria.
Learning outcomes are a success that students have as a result of their own expe- riences in interacting with their environment through the training process of skills, perse- verance, and knowledge that exist within stu- dents (Pramika, 2018). In addition, learning outcomes can be seen from the teacher pro- viding an evaluation to determine learning outcomes, the teacher usually gives a value after the students participate in teaching and learning activities after which they are given questions or tests, the test is in the form of a written test or an oral test. Assessment of lear- ning outcomes is a teacher activity related to making decisions about competency competi- tions or student learning outcomes during the learning process (Hamid, 2016).
A written test is a test in which the ques- tions are answered by students by providing written answers. Writing a written test is the most important activity in preparing exam materials. Each item of questions written must be based on the formulation of indicators that have been arranged in a grid but in the imple- mentation of the written test the teacher will find it difficult to control the student whether the results are done alone or by someone else.
While the oral test is a test that in its implementation requires students to provide answers orally. Oral tests are also carried out by holding student and teacher conversations about the problems being tested. In this test the teacher can find out how much material the students have absorbed according to the students’ abilities and language style. Okta- viyanti & Rosyidah (2019) The advantages and disadvantages of written tests and oral tests, educators need to try this form of test to measure learning outcomes so that they are more valid, therefore the researcher wants to give an oral test to see which test is better. The- refore, it can be seen whether there is a diffe- rence in learning outcomes between students who are given a written test and an oral test.
Learning can not be separated from eve- ryday life both studying at school and outside school to find out whether the lesson is suc- INTrODucTION
Globalization is an era of mass change due to the influence of foreign cultures (Mur- ti, 2015). Entering the current era of globali- zation, the progress of science and technology is very rapid which allows us to obtain a lot of information quickly and easily from vario- us places in the world (Rahayu & Kusuma, 2019). In the current era of globalization, the development of science and technology is very important, because all aspects of life depend on how mastery of science and technology is to bring about better changes for the progress of a nation. In addition to the progress of a nation, science and technology also has a po- sitive impact on global competition which is increasing. Therefore, the government seeks to advance the quality of education, especial- ly in Indonesia so that it is on par with more developed countries. To achieve this goal, the government provides a forum where schools are one of them as educational institutions.
Schools are places where the teaching and learning process takes place in order to achieve national education goals (Anggraeni et al., 2016). In addition, school as a social subsystem that functions in integrating all the subsystems in it (Kurniasari et al., 2019).
School as a place to carry out teaching and learning activities must always measure stu- dents’ abilities through evaluation. Evaluati- on activities are an integral component in the learning program (Solichin, 2017). Evaluation can carried out during and after the learning process (Hasanah et al., 2015).
Parameters used to measure the level of educational success are student learning outcomes (Sutardi & Sugiharsono, 2016). In addition, learning outcomes have an impor- tant role in the teaching and learning process because teachers want to know the extent of students’ abilities in achieving the teaching and learning process. Based on initial observa- tions, the researcher got information from one of the economics subject teachers in class X Social Sciences at SMA Negeri 8 Palembang that the economics subject had reached the
cessful or not can be seen from the learning process and learning outcomes achieved by students. Learning is said to be successful if there is a change in students, from those who are not good to be good, those who are good to be better and those who do not know to know.
Learning is one of the factors that in- fluence and play an important role in perso- nal formation and individual behavior. Me- anwhile, Azmi et al. (2017) Learning involves cognitive, affective and psychomotor aspects.
In line with Febriansyah (2017) Learning is a process in whih individuals try to acquire kno- wledge, skills and complex changes and beha- viors. Learning is interpreted as a process of changing behavior as a result individual inter- action with the environment (Pane & Darwis Dasopang, 2017). From some of the opinions that have been described learning is one of the factors to obtain a change in behavior where the individual as a whole wants to gain new experiences that are manifested in the form of changes to the learning environment. Factors that influence learning can be classified into two groups, namely internal and external fac- tors. Learning achievements that have been achieved by a person is the result of the inte- raction as factors that influence it both from within oneself (internal factors) and from outside oneself (external factor) (Syafi’i et al., 2018).
Internal factor there are three factors that influence learning, namely physical fac- tors, psychological factors, and fatigue factors (Slameto, 2010). (1) Physical Factor, In physi- cal factors, there are 2 factors that affect lear- ning, namely health factors and physical disa- bilities. (2) Psychological Factors. The factors that influence learning in this psychological factor are classified into seven factors, namely intelligence, attention, interest, talent, moti- ve, maturity, and readiness. (3) Fatigue Fac- tor, Each individual will feel tired after doing activities. The fatigue factor is divided into 2 types, namely physical fatigue and spiritual fatigue.
External factors that affect learning can be grouped into three factors, namely fami-
ly, school and community factors. (1) Family Factor, Students who learn will receive in- fluence from the family in the form of: the way parents educate, the relationship between fa- mily members, the household atmosphere and the family’s economic situation. (2) School Factor, School factors that influence learning include teaching methods, curriculum, teach- er-student relations, school discipline, student tools, school time, standart lessons over size, building conditions, learning methods, home- work assignments. (3) Community Factor, So- ciety influences student learning. This influen- ce occurs because of the presence of students in the community. Based on these community factors, it is influenced through student activi- ties in society, the mass media, friends to hang out with, and forms of community life.
The learning process involves two sub- jects, namely teachers and students will produ- ce a change in students as a result of a learning activity. Besides, the success of students is also influenced by the quality of teaching and in- ternal and external factors of the students themselves. Learning outcomes are a final as- sessment of the process and introduction that has been done repeatedly (Lestari, 2017).
Learning outcomes are a success that students have as a result of their own expe- riences in interacting with their environment through the process of training, skills, perseve- rance, knowledge that is in students (Pramika, 2018). A similar opinion is also Pratiwi (2018) Learning Outcomes are changes in the cogni- tive area, attitudes and skills that a person has after receiving a learning experience. Further- more, Yulaini & Anggraini (2020) Learning Outcomes are an achievement in the form of student behavior seen from cognitive, affecti- ve, and psychomotor aspects.
Learning outcomes are said to be suc- cessful if they achieve educational goals. Based on the description above, it can be concluded that learning outcomes are an assessment of the success that a person has after receiving a learning experience in the form of behavior seen from the cognitive, affective, and psycho- motor aspects. Evaluation is an important
part of the education cycle. The results of the evaluation are also very influential in making decisions by related parties such as teachers.
Therefore, evaluation is the main activity that must be carried out by a teacher in learning activities to determine the results of learning (Aulia & Sontani, 2018).
Teaching and learning evaluation ac- tivities are closely realted with measurement activities in the form of learning outcomes tests (Sembiring & ., 2013). Above it can be concluded that the evaluation of learning outcomes is a process that plans to make al- ternative decisions that always adhere to the overall principle, continuity, and the principle of objectivity as the main function to impro- ve again. Evaluation is an activity to get in- formation about student learning outcomes as a whole (Aisyah et al., 2021). Based on the opinion, it can be concluded that the eva- luation of learning achievement is a process of planning learning outcomes which in its implementation adhere to basic principles, to measure learning progress properly. There are many types in undergoing assessment of lear- ning outcomes, most of them use written tests because they feel they have time to think when dealing with teachers.
Written Tests are written questions and answers, including multiple choice, essays, true and false, matchmaking and descriptions (Diputera, 2019). Rofiah et al., (2013) Writ- ten test other than used to know the student’s ability profile, can also be used as a means of training students’ ability to think higher level.
Meanwhile, according to (Fitriani, 2013) writ- ten Test is a test in which the questions must be answered by students by providing written answers. Purwanto (2017) In general, written tests have advantages and disadvantages.
First, the advantages of the written test are as follows: (1) can simultaneously assess the group in a short time. (2) For the answe- rer there is freedom to choose and answer. (3) Because the questions are the same, the scope and content of the knowledge that is assessed by everyone is the same. Second, the weaknes- ses of the written test are as follows: (1) can’t
really judge a person’s individuality and perso- nality. (2) It’s easy to cheat and fake answers.
(3) It is easy to cause speculation for the per- son who will be tested.
Oral Test is a test whose implementati- on is carried out by holding direct questions and answers between educators and students (Fitriani, 2013). In general, oral tests have ad- vantages and disadvantages (Purwanto, 2017).
The advantages of the oral test are as follows:
(1) More able to assess a person’s personality and knowledge content because it is done face to face. (2) If the answerer is not clear, the tes- ter can change the questions so that the ans- werer understands. (3) From the attitude and way of answering, the tester can find out what is ”implied” as well as what is ”expressed”.
(4) The tester can dig into the contents of a person’s knowledge in detail and can find out which field of knowledge he has more and li- kes. (5) To evaluate certain skills, such as Eng- lish and so on, oral tests are faster. (6) Testers can immediately know the contents.
The weaknesses of the oral test are as follows: (1) If the relationship between the tester and the testee is not good, it can inter- fere with the objectivity of the test results. (2) The nervous nature of the test can interfere with the smoothness of the answers given. (3) The questions asked can always be the same for each person who takes the test. (4) To test the group takes a very long time so it is not economical. (5) No or lack of freedom for the answerer. (6) The personality and attitude of the tester and his relationship with the testee allows for less objective results.
Based on the advantages and disadvan- tages possessed by the oral test and the writ- ten test, it is necessary to try both forms of the test to measure both teachers and lecturers creating learning to be more valid. Therefore, there is no harm in the form of assessment of learning outcomes by using a written test and an oral test. According to Febriansyah (2017) Economics is a science that studies how in- dividuals or communities choose how to use scarce resources to fulfill their needs as an effort to achieve prosperity. From the above
opinion, it can be concluded that economics is a science that studies how individuals utilize existing natural resources.
mETHODS
In this study, the method used was quantitative with a comparative approach.
The population in this study was the entire X Social Sciences class totaling 97 students. The technique used in taking the sample was a ran- dom sampling technique. The sample in this study was taken from 2 classes, namely, class X IPS 1 and class X IPS 2. The group that was given a written test was class X IPS 1 and the group that was given an oral test, namely class X IPS 2.
Data collection techniques in this rese- arch used several data collection methods, na- mely: (1) Documentation in this study is used to obtain archived data, for example data on students, the number of teachers and emplo- yees, and supporting facilities for the learning process at the research location. The formula used is as follows:
NP = (R/SM) X100 Description:
N: The percent value sought or expected R : Raw scores obtained by students SM: The ideal maximum score of the test concerned.
rESuLTS AND DIScuSSION
From the results of the study conducted by the researchers, it is known that the num- ber of students in class X IPS1 who scored 80- 86 were 6 people or 18.75% of the students who took the test, and were categorized as very good. 12 students who scored 66-79 or 37.5% were categorized as good. 6 students who scored 59-65 or 18.75% were categori- zed as enough. Meanwhile, 8 students who scored 45-58 or 24.98% were categorized as poor. Meanwhile, in class X IPS2, 11 students who scored 66-79 or 34.40 % were categorized as good. Meanwhile, 11 students who scored 59-65 or 34.40 % were categorized as good enough. 10 students who got a score of 40-53 or 31.20% were categorized as poor.
The written test used multiple choice questions by choosing one correct answer by circling. In general, written tests have advan- tages and disadvantages, while the advantages of written tests are as follows: (1) can simulta- neously assess the group in a short time (2) for the answerer there is freedom in a short time (3) because the questions are the same, scope and knowledge which people’s values are not the same either.
Furthermore, the weaknesses of the written test are as follows (1) it cannot really assess the individual and a person’s personality (2) can lead to cheating and false answers (3) it is easy to cause speculation for people who Table 1. Criteria of Test Results
No Mastery Level
Letter
Value Weight Description
1. 86%-100% A 4 Very good
2. 76%-85% B 3 Good
3. 60%-75% C 2 Enough
4. 55%-595 D 1 Poor
5. - 54% E 0 Very Poor
Source: Primary data processed, 2021 Table 2. Learning Outcomes of Class X IPS 1 and X IPS 2
Range
Class X IPS 1
Kelas X
IPS 2 Criteria
F % F %
80-86 6 18,75 0 0 Very
good 66-79 12 37,5 11 34,40 Good 59-65 6 18.75 11 34,40 Enough 45-58 8 24,98 10 31,20 Poor
≤ 40 0 0 0 Very
Poor
Amount 32 100 32 100
Average 6.7 6,0
will be tested. The oral test in its implementa- tion is carried out by holding direct questions and answers between teachers and students.
Oral tests are questions that are given orally answered.
Based on the results of the study entitled the difference in learning outcomes between students given a written test and an oral test.
Better results were written tests because writ- ten tests could still think about determining which answers would be answered and could even read the questions repeatedly when the teacher gave questions, while oral tests were more likely to answer spontaneously which made students unable think more to determi- ne the answer because the oral test was more about listening to the questions given by the teacher orally.
Oral tests also have advantages and disadvantages. The weaknesses (1) are more able to assess the personality of the content of one’s knowledge because it is done face to face (2) if the answerer is not clear, the tester can change the questions so that the answerer understands (3) from the attitude and method of the answerer, the tester can know what is
”implied” and ”expressed” (4) the tester can assess the content of a person’s knowledge in detail and can find out which field of know- ledge he has more and likes (5) to find out cer- tain skills, such as English and so on, oral tests are better fast (6) the tester can immediately know the contents of the answer.
While the weaknesses of the oral test (1) if the relationship between the tester and the testee is not good, it can interfere with the ob- jectivity of the test results (2) the nervous natu- re of the test can interfere with the smoothness of the answers given (3) the same question can always be asked the same in each the person being tested (4) to test the group takes a very long time so that it is not economical (5) there is no or lack of freedom for the answerer (6) a person whose attitude and relationship with those being tested allows less objective results.
From the opinion above, it can be con- cluded that the written test is a test that can determine the extent of students’ knowledge
and ability in understanding the material whi- le the oral test is a test to test the readiness of students, and understand the material quickly.
So from the two tests which method can imp- rove student learning outcomes for the better?
Based on the results of the study, it showed that the final test that had carried out written tests and oral tests distinguished which lear- ning outcomes were higher in the average va- lue of learning outcomes in classes given writ- ten tests and oral tests.
In line with the results of this study, it was supported by research conducted by Yussa’diah, (2012) regarding the comparison of student learning outcomes given written tests and description tests on rectangular and square sub-topics in class VII SMP Negeri 8 Cirebon. From the results of the study, the ave- rage post-test value of the experimental class (oral test) was 84.32 and the average value of the experimental class 2 (description test) was 37.76, while the results of the N-Gain hypot- hesis obtained a significant value of 0.000<
0.05, seen by comparing the N-Gain of the ex- perimental class 1 (oral test) with the N-Gain of the experimental class 2 (description test) the average N-Gain learning outcomes of the experimental class 1 (oral test) was 75.16%
and the average N-Gain of experimental class 2 students’ learning outcomes (test descrip- tion) was 59.46%, significance <0.05 means Ho was rejected. This showed that there were differences in learning outcomes between stu- dents who used oral tests and students who used description tests.
This research was also supported by Fitriani (2013) regarding the comparison of Biology learning outcomes for Al Islam Seni- or High School students in Surakarta through Written Tests and Oral Tests in Review of Self- Concept. This type of research was a quasi- experimental. The results of this study indica- ted that there were differences in the daily test scores of biology subjects with written tests and oral tests on students, students who had high self-concept had high biology learning outcomes through written tests and oral tests and students who had low self-concepts had
trials showed that the questions had high re- liability; the items had high discriminatory power, and an ideal level of difficulty. From this research, it showed that the written test was better than the written test. The difference between this research and previous research was (1) the place of the research was different (2) the subjects studied were different (3) the title of the research was different, where the previous research was entitled Comparison of Biology Learning Outcomes of High School Students Al Islam 3 Surakarta Through Writ- ten Tests.
cONcLuSION
In this study, there were many written tests for SMA N 8 Palembang stated to be bet- ter than oral tests. The average learning out- comes of class X IPS1 students who scored 80-86 were 6 people or 18.75% of students who took the test, and were categorized as very good. 12 students who scored 66-79 or 37.5% were categorized as good. 6 students who scored 59-65 or 18.75% were categori- zed as sufficient. Meanwhile, 8 students who scored 45-58 or 24.98% were categorized as poor. Meanwhile, in class X IPS2, 11 students who scored 66-79 or 34.40% were categorized as good. Meanwhile, 11 students who scored 59-65 or 34.40% were categorized as good. 10 students who scored 40-53 or 31.20% were categorized as poor. There were differences in student learning outcomes that were given written tests and oral tests on economics sub- jects for class X Social Studies at SMA Negeri 8 Palemban for the 2020/2021 academic year.
rEFErENcES
Aisyah, N., 1, D., & Dewi, R. M. (2021). Pengem- bangan Aplikasi Kahoot Sebagai Media Evaluasi Hasil Belajar Siswa. Edukatif : Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 3(4), 1647–1659.
https://www.edukatif.org/index.php/edu- katif/article/view/656
Anggraeni, I., Komariah, A., Kurniatun, T. C., &
Pendidikan, P. A. (2016). Kinerja Mana- low biology learning outcomes and written
tests and oral tests, there was no interaction between written tests and oral tests with self- concept in their influence on biology learning outcomes.
The development of a written test and oral test access student’s skills (Sasmito Aji &
Winarno, 2016). The method used a research and development approach (research and de- velopment). The steps in this study (1) identi- fied and measured the purpose of the measu- ring area (2) component decomposition (3) created a grid (4) wrote test items (5) tested content validation (6) readability test. This re- search resulted in a test instrument for mat- hematical communication skills at the high school level.
The Development of Written Test As- sessment Instruments in the Form of Desc- riptions for PAI Learning Based on Fiqh Ma- terial Problems (Muttaqin & Kusaeri, 2017).
This research was development research con- sisting of seven steps, namely (1) specifica- tions, (2) writing questions (3) studying ques- tions (4) improving tests (5) conducting tests (6) analyzing items. The instrument test was carried out at MTSN 4 Sidoarjo, the selection of the instrument subject was carried out with the help of excel software. The item parame- ters were analyzed by using classical techni- ques which included: the level of difficulty and the differentiating power of the questions.
The validity of the instrument was obtained from an expert assessment by using a validity sheet. The reliability of the test was analyzed by using Flanagan’s equation. This study pro- duced six written test questions in the form of non-objective descriptions for basic religious learning on religious issues. The validity re- sults showed that the resulting instrument was very valid with an average total validity of 3.6.
The test items had a difficulty level parameter in the range of 0.3-0.7 with the lowest diffi- culty index of 0.53 with a low discriminating power index of 0.24 and a high of 0.36. The instrument had a very high reliability of 0.819.
The contents of the questions had been validated by experts, and the results of field
jerial Kepala Sekolah, Kinerja Mengajar Guru Dan Mutu Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Administrasi Pendidikan, 23(2). https://doi.
org/10.17509/jap.v23i2.5640
Aulia, R., & Sontani, U. T. (2018). Pengelolaan Kelas Sebagai Determinan Terhadap Hasil Belajar. Jurnal Pendidikan Manajemen Perkan- toran, 3(2), 9. https://doi.org/10.17509/
jpm.v3i2.11759
Azmi, F., Halimah, S., & Pohan, N. (2017). Pelak- sanaan Pembimbingan Belajar Amal Shaleh Medan. Nurbiah Poh, 1(1), 15–28. http://
jurnal.uinsu.ac.id/index.php/attazakki/ar- ticle/download/853/645
Diputera, A. M. (2019). Teori Penilaian Tes Essai atau Uraian. Journal Reseapedia, 1(1), 1–3.
Febriansyah. (2017). Pengaruh Penerapan Metode Kombinasi Ceramah, Demonstrasi dan Latihan (CDL) Terhadap Hasil Belajar Komputer Akuntansi Siswa Di Smk Negeri 1 Palembang Tahun Ajaran 2015/2016. Ju- rnal Neraca ISSN : 2580-2690, 1(1), 49–62.
Fitriani, F. (2013). Perbandingan Hasil Belajar Bi- ologi Siswa SMA Al Islam 3 Surakarta An- tara Tes Tulis Dan Tes Lisan Ditinjau Dari Konsep Diri (Doctoral dissertation, UMS).
Hamid, M. A. (2016). Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Hasil Belajar Siswa Berbasis TIK pada Pembelajaran Dasar Listrik Elektron- ika. VOLT : Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Teknik Elektro, 1(1), 37–46.
Hasanah, U., Prasetyo, T., & Lukiati, B. (2015).
Analisis Pelaksanaan Evaluasi Pembela- jaran Biologi Kelas X Semester Genap 2013/2014 Di Sman Kota Blitar. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 7(1), 39–46. https://doi.
org/10.17977/um052v7i1p39-46
Kurniasari, N., Kusdiwelirawan, A., & Hartini, T. I. (2019). Menganalisis Kebijakan Profe- sional Pendidik Mata Pelajaran Fisika Pada Sekolah Muhammadiyah Jakarta. SINAFI (Seminar Nasional Fisika), 1(1), 158.
Lestari, N. D. (2017). Perbedaan Hasil Belajar Akuntansi Siswa Dalam Penerapan Konsep Psikologi Kapital Intelektual Dengan Kapi- tal Sosial di SMK Muhammadiyah 2 Palem- bang Tahun Pelajaran 2014/2015. Jurnal Neraca: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Ilmu Ekonomi
Akuntansi, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.31851/
neraca.v1i1.1168
Murti, S. (2015). Eksistensi Penggunaan Bahasa Indonesia di Era Globalisasi. Parole (Ju- rnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indone- sia), 1(2), 177–184. http://repository.unib.
ac.id/11123/1/18-Sri Murti.pdf
Muttaqin, M. Z., & Kusaeri, K. (2017). Pengem- bangan Instrumen Penilaian Tes Tertulis Bentuk Uraian Untuk Pembelajaran Pai Berbasis Masalah Materi Fiqh. Jurnal Tatsq- if, 15(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.20414/j- tatsqif.v15i1.1154
Oktaviyanti, I., & Rosyidah, A. N. K. (2019). Ko- relasi Antara Hasil Tes Lisan Dengan Ha- sil Tes Tertulis Pada Mahasiswa Pgsd Un- ram. Inteligensi : Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 2(1), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.33366/ilg.
v2i1.1514
Pane, A., & Darwis Dasopang, M. (2017). Belajar dan Pembelajaran. FITRAH:Jurnal Kajian Ilmu-Ilmu Keislaman, 3(2), 333. https://doi.
org/10.24952/fitrah.v3i2.945
Pramika, D. & W. M. (2018). Buku Saku Sebagai Media Pembelajaran Matematika Ekonomi di Program Studi Pendidikan Akuntansi FKIP Universitas PGRI Palembang. Jur- nal Program Studi Pendidikan Ekonomi, 6(2), 1-undefined. https://www.ojs.fkip.um- metro.ac.id/index.php/ekonomi/article/
view/1685
Pratiwi, N. (2018). Meningkatkankan Hasil Be- lajar Siswa Melalui Metode Investigasi Kelompok dengan Variabel Moderator Kemandirian Belajar. Prosiding Seminar Na- sional Program Pascasarjana Universitas Pgri Palembang, 5(5).
Purwanto, N. (2017). Prinsip-Pronsip dan Teknik Evaluasi Pengajaran. PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Rahayu, L. D., & Kusuma, A. B. (2019). Peran Pendidikan Matematika di Era Globalisa- si. Prosiding Sendika, 5(1), 534–541.http://
eproceedings.umpwr.ac.id/index.php/sen- dika/article/view/801
Rofiah, E., Aminah, N., & Ekawati, E. (2013).
Penyusunan Instrumen Tes Kemampuan Berpikir Tingkat Tinggi Fisika Pada Siswa SMP. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Universitas Se-
belas Maret, 1(2), 120699.
Sasmito Aji, B., & Winarno, M. E. (2016).
Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Penge- tahuan Mata Pelajaran Pendidikan Jasmani Olahraga dan Kesehatan (PJOK) kelas VIII Semester Gasal. Jurnal Pendidikan, 1(April 2015), 1449.
Sembiring, R. B., & . M. (2013). Strategi Pembe- lajaran Dan Minat Belajar Terhadap Ha- sil Belajar Matematika. Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan (JTP), 6(2), 34–44. https://doi.
org/10.24114/jtp.v6i2.4996
Slameto, B. (2010). Belajar dan Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhinya. PT. Rineka Cipta.
Solichin, M. (2017). Analisis Daya Beda Soal Taraf Kesukaran,Butir Tes, Validitas Butir Tes, Interpretasi Hasil Tes Valliditas Ramalan dalam Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jurnal Manaje- men dan Pendidikan Islam, 2(2), 192–213.
Sutardi, S., & Sugiharsono, S. (2016). Pengaruh Kompetensi Guru, Motivasi Belajar, Dan Lingkungan Keluarga Terhadap Hasil Be-
lajar Mata Pelajaran Ekonomi. Harmoni Sosial: Jurnal Pendidikan IPS, 3(2), 188–198.
https://doi.org/10.21831/hsjpi.v3i2.8400 Syafi’i, A., Marfiyanto, T., & Rodiyah, S. K.
(2018). Studi Tentang Prestasi Belajar Siswa Dalam Berbagai Aspek Dan Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi. Jurnal Komunikasi Pendidi- kan, 2(2), 115. https://doi.org/10.32585/
jkp.v2i2.114
Yulaini, E., & Anggraini, M. (2020). Pengaruh Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kooperatif Tipe Kartu Arisan Terhadap Hasil Belajar Di Sma Negeri 8 Palembang. Jurnal Neraca:
Jurnal Pendidikan dan Ilmu Ekonomi Akun- tansi, 4(1), 108. https://doi.org/10.31851/
neraca.v4i1.3638
Yussa’diah, T. I. A. (2012). Perbandingan Hasil Be- lajar Siswa Antara yang Menggunakan Tes Lisan dengan Tes Uraian Pada Sub Pokok Bahasan Persegi Panjang dan Persegi Di Kelas Vii Smpn 8 Kota Cirebon (Doctoral dissertation, IAIN Syekh Nurjati Cirebon).
